[Linux-cachefs] Problems testing Lustre filesystem with fscache / cachefiles
David Howells
dhowells at redhat.com
Wed Dec 17 19:10:31 UTC 2008
John Groves <John at groves.net> wrote:
> The main constraint is that I'm stuck, for now, with EL5 kernels due to
> copious dependencies in the Lustre 1.6.* source base. This is a big issue,
> but it looks like it should not be a deal breaker. I'm currently running
> kernel 2.6.18-53.1.14.
Where did you get your fscache kernel patches from?
The ones that come built in to the RHEL-5 kernel are unstable. The newer ones
are much better, but probably not usable with RHEL-5.
> fscache / cachefiles works when /var/fscache is just a directory on my boot
> drive (ext3). That's nice, but my boot drive is not faster than my network
> (I can stream about 700MB/s over infiniband, and my lustre object servers
> can keep up with that). My boot drive is good for about 60MB/s.
Yeah. Caching NFS that's coming over GigE is a complete waste of time if
you're just looking for performance enhancements in what I've observed if
there's no conflicting traffic on the wire.
> - With ext3 on the ramdisk, cachefilesd dies on startup.
When you say 'dies' does cachefilesd just die, or is there an oops? Is
anything dumped to dmesg?
> Cachefiles came in the kernel, and I installed cachefilesd with yum.
If it's the RHEL-5 cachefiles, you're probably doomed, unfortunately. I know
it's unstable, but finding the source of the instability is a pain. The newer
patches are much better. I really must try backporting them.
David
More information about the Linux-cachefs
mailing list